ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
January-1916 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 9518 January 3, 1916 - FRANCISCO ROSCO v. MARIANO REBUENO

    033 Phil 105

  • G.R. No. 10318 January 3, 1916 - ANTONIO M.A BARRETTO v. TOMAS CABREZA

    033 Phil 112

  • G.R. Nos. 11379 & 11380 January 3, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. YU TEN

    033 Phil 122

  • G.R. No. 10992 January 6, 1916 - QUE QUAY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. 10089 January 7, 1916 - VICTORIA AYLLON v. MIGUEL SIOJO

    033 Phil 145

  • G.R. No. 10212 January 7, 1916 - INSULAR LIFE ASSURANCE CO. v. GAUDENCIO ELEIZEGUI

    033 Phil 148

  • G.R. No. 9252 January 11, 1916 - SINFOROSO PASCUAL v. WM. T. NOLTING

    033 Phil 154

  • G.R. No. 9759 January 11, 1916 - PHILIPPINE RAILWAY CO. v. IGNACIO DURAN

    033 Phil 156

  • G.R. No. 10422 January 11, 1916 - A. LEMOINE v. C. ALKAN

    033 Phil 162

  • G.R. No. 10863 January 11, 1916 - HERMOGENES DE JESUS v. G. URRUTIA & CO.

    033 Phil 171

  • G.R. No. 11078 January 11, 1916 - CLIFFORD H. LOGAN v. PHILIPPINE ACETYLENE CO.

    033 Phil 177

  • G.R. No. 11088 January 11, 1916 - LIM CHING v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 186

  • G.R. No. 7798 January 14, 1916 - ANGELA C. GARCIA v. JOAQUIN DEL ROSARIO

    033 Phil 189

  • G.R. Nos. 10381 & 10714 January 14, 1916 - TRITON INSURANCE CO. v. ANGEL JOSE

    033 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 10738 January 14, 1916 - RUEDA HERMANOS & CO. v. FELIX PAGLINAWAN & CO.

    033 Phil 196

  • G.R. No. 10849 January 14, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. LUIS IGNACIO

    033 Phil 202

  • G.R. No. 11015 January 14, 1916 - PERPETUO FLORES TAN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 205

  • G.R. No. 11002 January 17, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. MATEO P. PALACIO

    033 Phil 208

  • G.R. No. 7988 January 19, 1916 - YOUNG MEN’S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF MANILA v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

    033 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 9806 January 19, 1916 - LEONIDES LOPEZ LISO v. MANUEL TAMBUNTING

    033 Phil 226

  • G.R. No. 10141 January 20, 1916 - MARGARITA SANTOS v. AGUSTIN ACOSTA

    033 Phil 229

  • G.R. No. 10711 January 20, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. KONG FONG

    033 Phil 234

  • G.R. No. 10731 January 20, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. LORENZO LOPEZ QUIM QUINCO

    033 Phil 239

  • G.R. No. 10783 January 20, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. AGRIPINO AGONCILLO

    033 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 10854 January 21, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. NG TUY

    033 Phil 261

  • G.R. No. 10436 January 24, 1916 - FRANCISCA EGUARAS v. GREAT EASTERN LIFE ASSURANCE CO.

    033 Phil 263

  • G.R. No. 10989 January 24, 1916 - GO PAW v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 278

  • G.R. No. 10759 January 25, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO VERZOLA

    033 Phil 285

  • G.R. No. 10259 January 26, 1916 - CITY OF MANILA v. ALICE J. NEAL

    033 Phil 291

  • G.R. No. 9087 January 27, 1916 - MARIANO G. VELOSO v. JOSE HEREDIA

    033 Phil 306

  • G.R. No. 10057 January 27, 1916 - DIAO CONTINO v. NOVO & COMPANY

    033 Phil 310

  • G.R. No. 10099 January 27, 1916 - TEOFILA DEL ROSARIO DE COSTA v. LA BADENIA

    033 Phil 316

  • G.R. No. 10528 January 27, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO MONTEROSO

    033 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. 10537 January 27, 1916 - M. EARNSHAW & COMPANY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 327

  • G.R. No. 10972 January 28, 1916 - LEE CHING v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    033 Phil 329

  • G.R. No. 10557 January 29, 1916 - MARIA BALTAZAR v. APOLONIA ALBERTO

    033 Phil 336

  • G.R. No. 10907 January 29, 1916 - ONG JANG CHUAN v. WISE & CO. (LTD.)

    033 Phil 339

  • G.R. No. 10040 January 31, 1916 - EUGENIA LICHAUCO v. FAUSTINO LICHAUCO

    033 Phil 350

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 10537   January 27, 1916 - M. EARNSHAW & COMPANY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS<br /><br />033 Phil 327

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 10537. January 27, 1916. ]

    M. EARNSHAW & COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, Defendant-Appellee.

    Beaumont & Tenney for Appellant.

    Attorney-General Avanceña for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CUSTOMS DUTIES; TARIFF LAW OF 1909; FREE ENTRY OF ARTICLES USED IN CONSTRUCTION OF MARINE RAILWAY. — The statute providing for the free entry into the Philippine Islands of articles used "in the construction, equipment, or repair of vessels, their machinery, tackle, or apparel" or "used in the construction, equipment, or repair within the Philippine Islands of vessels, their machinery, tackle, or apparel," does not authorize the admission free of duty of materials used in the construction of a marine railway.


    D E C I S I O N


    TRENT, J. :


    This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance of Manila in four cases entitled M. Earnshaw & Co. v. The Insular Collector of Customs, and numbered Customs Appeal cases 188, 189, 190, and 191. By agreement of the parties, for the purposes of this appeal, the four cases were united in one and will be considered together.

    The facts, as agreed upon, are as follows: All the materials imported and in controversy in the four cases, except certain specified steel wrenches, were intended at the time of their importation to be used in the construction of a marine railway at the port of Manila, and all such materials, with the exception noted, have been actually used for that purpose. Some of the articles could not be used to advantage, if at all, for any other purpose and some could be used with equal advantage for other purposes.

    The sole question presented is whether the goods thus imported should be admitted free of duty under sections [paragraphs] 307 and 349, or either of them, of the Tariff Law of 1909. These sections [paragraphs] read:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "307. Articles, including anchors, binnacles, propellers, and the like, the character of which, as imported, prevents their use for other purposes than the construction, equipment, or repair of vessels, and life preservers and life buoys.

    "349. Articles and materials actually used in the construction, equipment, or repair within the Philippine Islands of vessels, their machinery, tackle, or apparel, subject to such restrictions, conditions, and regulations as the Insular Collector of Customs shall prescribe."cralaw virtua1aw library

    According to the plain and unambiguous language used in the above sections [paragraphs], the only articles admitted free of entry are articles used in "the construction, equipment, or repair of vessels and life-preservers and life buoys" or "used in the construction, equipment, or repair within the Philippine Islands of vessels, their machinery, tackle, or apparel." All of the articles were used "in the construction of a marine railway." It is not contended that a marine railway is an integral part of a vessel. But it is urged that as a marine railway is essential to the repair of vessels, the material constituting it should, for that reason, be admitted free of duty. The sections [paragraphs] above quoted do not justify this conclusion. It depends upon the dockyard whether a marine railway is at all essential or not. In some instances such a railway is not used at all. In others it is. The Plaintiff company has found it more convenient to construct a marine railway to aid in the repairing of vessels than to construct its yard without this railway. The sections [paragraphs], under which free entry is claimed, make no reference to marine railways. Consequently, the rulings of the Collector are correct.

    The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs against the Appellant. So ordered.

    Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson, Carson, and Moreland, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. 10537   January 27, 1916 - M. EARNSHAW & COMPANY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS<br /><br />033 Phil 327


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED